brickclubfandomcom-20200213-history
1.4.3-Kalevala-sage
Les Misérables Brick!Club, kind of 1.4.2 to 1.5.1, or a Fandom Analysis Citing 1.4.3 Retroblogging after a little confusion over which chapter is today’s (and as such am stepping out of the comfort of reblogs), but between the two extremes of a child’s pathos and a man’s economically prosperous innovation, I have no real reaction regardless of where we are in the text—the latter because I am hardly a fiscal pragmatist and the former because, ironically, of a phenomenon documented in the text. I am referring, of course, to the “''Certaines natures ne peuvent aimer d’un côté sans haïr de l’autre''" about which so many others have already commented, but for which the group would need a heartless bastard like me to point out the converse is exactly Hugo’s scheme for his readers. Never mind that the entire protagonist/antagonist thing is, from a contemporary lens, childish and passé—Les Mis is potentially old enough to skirt such criticism—but a few days ago, Pilf both pointed out the unequivocal ugliness of Hugo’s “baddies” and, alongside multiple other readers, caviled at the juvenility of the “fat pathetic romance reader” trope hovering about Mme Thénard (or was it the association of said trope with villainy?). But it still worked, didn’t it? As if my non-polarized reaction to Tholomyès wasn’t indicator enough of a shaky morality (perhaps if he hadn’t been well-read, or Pyrrhonian), I personally happen to be cold and insensitive and lacking in any particular fondness for either Fantine or Cosette, but one could easily argue that yesterday’s otherwise-ubiquitous Lark-related heartbreak illustrates an affection illogical without its parallel hatred. In short, cynicism and other I-hate-everything attitudes aside, visceral reactions to Tholomyès’s watery eye and Mme Thénardier’s unattractiveness (not because she’s heavy but because she’s not literary, before everyone goes up in arms) seem to have effectively propagated a victim-love-fest for Fantine and Cosette. Compare the reactions of radical feminists to male and female victims of rape…wait, I’m not going on that tangent. All things considered, neither Fantine nor Cosette has done anything particularly admirable thus far, so are they only favourites for their suffering at the hands of our villains? Hugo, your fictional characters are anything but objective; I reject your third-person omniscience and substitute my own. Commentary Pilferingapples Without going too much into The Lark again, because BAD PLACE BAD PLACE for me, I rather thought the obvious attempts to dismiss Mme Thenardier’s reading habits came as close as anything could to endearing her to a lot of us? What’s keeping her in the AGH NO camp is the child abuse. And what would you have a toddler/child do to be admirable? Cosette is indeed deserving of sympathy because of her suffering alone, as far as I’m concerned. I was hugely relieved to see so many club posts extending that same sympathy to Eponine and Azelma, too. I’m less horrified by the whole Thenardier situation than the village situation; the one could be escaped if the other weren’t so pervasive and OK WOW NO I can’t even do this, yikes. I did not know this about myself, so wow. But. OK, yes, I think I see what you’re getting at? The idea that suffering is only sympathetic if there’s a villain to blame for it, is that what you mean? If that’s it, I entirely reject that concept; pain is sympathetic because it’s pain, that’s all, and watching it happen without being able to do anything to help is awful and uh I have to leave this chapter, sorry. BUT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE INTERESTING I wish I could engage with them better?!? Also aheh, yeah, did anyone EVER say Hugo’s character portrayals were OBJECTIVE? Doeskin-pantaloons (reply to Pilferingapples) I’m interested in what you’re saying, kalevala-sage, because I have never been a huge Fantine fan myself, and I did get a feeling a while back that we were latching onto Favourite simply out of desperate need for a (female) character to latch onto. (Out of kind-of-related interest, I would be curious to see the gender breakdown of Brick!Club, to consider with regard to our desparation for Hugo to give us decent female characters). From what I understand however - and correct me if I’m wrong - what you’re saying is summed up here: …visceral reactions to Tholomyès’s watery eye and Mme Thénardier’s unattractiveness … seem to have effectively propagated a victim-love-fest for Fantine and Cosette. and I’m afraid I disagree. Firstly, because I don’t think people’s reactions to the chapter can be blamed on the unattractiveness of the characters. We don’t dislike the Tholomyes and Mme Thenardier because they don’t look pretty, we dislike them because Tholomyes just abandoned his girlfriend (?) of two years with a child and no means of supporting herself, and because Mme Thenardier engages in child-abuse. (By comparison, to take an example from later on in the book, Grantaire is explicitly described as ugly, and fans are all over him. Because he may be ugly, but he’s also a nice guy.) Secondly, I - personally, though I don’t know about everyone else - don’t see it as a victim-love-fest so much as a victim-sympathy-fest. I don’t *love* Cosette at this stage - I mean, she’s an adorable toddler, but she hasn’t done anything the actually provoke me to love her as a character. I just feel for her, because her situation is really really tragic. Similarly Fantine - she acts in ways I find irritating and don’t always agree with - but I can’t help feeling sorry for her, as well. So yes, we are doting on Fantine and Cosette a bit, but it because their lives suck right now. Given our options for favourites are pretty limited, we’re going to choose them over the Thenardier’s any day. And I don’t think it has to do with appearance.